Amol S/O Purushottam Patil And ... vs Smt. Rasul B Abdul Rafiq And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 9876 Bom

Judgment                                   1    913.wp.6008.2022judg.odt




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                    WRIT PETITION NO.6008 OF 2022

1.   Amol S/o. Purushottam Patil,
     Aged 45 Yrs., Occu.: Business,

2.   Abhilash S/o. Purushottam Patil,
     Aged 40 yrs. Occu.: Business,

3.   Vaishali D/o. Purushottam Patil,
     Aged 38 yrs. Occu.: Household,

4.   Rohini D/o. Purushottam Patil,
     Aged 35 yrs. Occu.: Household,

     Petitioner Nos. 3 & 4 through
     their POA Petitioner No. 5

5.   Suman Wd/o. Purushottam Patil,
     Aged 65 yrs. Occu.: Household,

     All the petitioners are resident of
     L-91, Behind Chokhamela Hostel,
     Vasant Nagar, Nagpur                      .... PETITIONERS

                                // VERSUS //

1.   Smt. Rasul B. Abdul Rafiq,
     Aged 57 Yrs., Occu.: Household,
     R/o. Plot No. 52-A, Sartaj Colony,
     Ashirvad Colony, Tajbagh, Nagpur

2.   Ashok Harischandra Patil,
     Aged Major, Occu.: not known,

3.   Smt. Suman Harischandra Patil,
     Aged Major, Occu.: not known,

4.   Smt. Alka Harischandra Patil,
     Aged Major, Occu.: not known,

5.   Smt. Rekha Harischandra Patil,
     Aged Major, Occu.: not known,
 Judgment                                 2                    913.wp.6008.2022judg.odt




6.   Smt Sushila Harischandra Patil,
     Aged Major, Occu.: not known,

7.   Smt Vithabai Harischandra Patil,
     Aged Major, Occu.: not known,

     Respondent Nos. 2 to 7 are residents of
     Mhada Complex, Near Bhole
     Petrol Pump, Amraoti Road, Nagpur.

8.   Tahsildar Nagpur (Gramin), Nagpur

9.   Revenue Inspector,
     Mouza Besa, P.H. No. 39,
     Khasra No.39/1, 39/2 & 39/3,
     Tahsil Office, Nagpur (Rural),
     Nagpur.

10. Talathi,
    Mouza Besa, P.H. No. 39,
    Khasra No. 39/1, 39/2 & 39/3,
    Tahsil Office, Nagpur (Rural),
    Nagpur.

11. Sub Divisional Officer Nagpur (Rural),
     Nagpur                                    .... RESPONDENTS
 ___________________________________________________________________
      Mr P. V. Vaidya, Advocate for petitioners
      Mr A. M. Deshpande, GP for respondent Nos.8, 9 and 11
__________________________________________________________________
                     CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                              G. A. SANAP, JJ.

DATED : 27.09.2022

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER : SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)

1] Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned GP

for respondent Nos. 8, 9 and 11, who appears by waiving notice. There

is no need to issue any notice to the remaining respondents, there

being no relief claimed against remaining respondents.

Judgment 3 913.wp.6008.2022judg.odt

2] Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3] Respondent No. 11 is directed to decide the application

filed by the petitioners dated 23.08.2022 and also the application dated

20.09.2022 in accordance with law, at the earliest, preferably within six

weeks from the date of receipt of the order, if not decided till date.

4] Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

(G. A. SANAP, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)

Namrata

Signed By:NAMRATA YOGESH DHARKAR P. A.

High Court Nagpur Signing Date:27.09.2022 18:33